Look , TL;DR : you are basically a proponent of marking any people having been caught adulterous with a red brand on their forehead. This is exactly what you want. Before google and other search engine we all enjoyed a right to be forgotten, in other word a right to be able to correct errors, and become better. If you brand people forever , you effectively destroy their life. Maybe you are an american ? That would explain it, US society seem good on punitive action but not so much on rehabilitation, or prevention.
"scientist X does his job and advanced knowledge a little bit" is unsexy. "scientist is surprised by X" "scientist says X is impossible to be later proven wrong" all are headline which sell 1000 more than the first. As a general rule all fellow scientist I ever worked with WANTED to be surprised, to write their name somewhere, in posterity, to find the new laws, new particle, new material or anything new, the dream of the average scientist is not to go to an event less day at work, or be proven correct in the actual existing knowledge. No the dream is to find something new breaking the old knowledge down and potentially maybe a nobel.
The only one with the "scientist don't like to go agaisnt dogma" or using the "old scientist being proven wrong" are people having NEVER met a scientist : the SAME people endorsing the film/tv serie caricature of a scientist (you know , the first guy being killed by a demon or meeting an angel, or the first guy killed by the monster he said was not existing, you know the trope) and projecting their own unwillingness to face toward the unknown. They think this is what scientist do, because this is what they would do (and in the case of people projecting CT often already do).
the sheer number of times scientists consider something to be 'scientifically impossible',
They are pretty damn rare, and often taken out of context (like the quote about airplane not being possible - it was about directed flight within the known engineering - dumb but not as dumb as saying flight in general was impossible - just look at birds). I have not seen many of them , usually it is down to claim not being shored up by evidence, but when that DO happens much later to have evidence, then they are recognized. e.g. plate tectonic or giant wave. But even those case are pretty damn rare, and scientist are willing to examine what goes against the old knowledge. If they did not we would still be back to 17th century knowledge. Who do you think threw everything and wanted answers ? The scientist of the 17th, 18th, 19th, 20th and 21st century ! Nobody else !
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
calculating the propellant fraction assuming a rocket is composed in fraction of anti mater. Plugging the tan equation to solve m0/m1 is where I got the 10tons / 4tons.
I calculated the energy requirement to have such acceleration, then converted to the BEST theoretical fuel , anti matter / matter. Fusion would still mean even more material to bring with you. Calculation i did using rocketery rukes is to have a 25% light speed then brake roughly shortly before arriving, and fir alpha centauri, was 4 tons anti matter fuel , for a 6 tons payload, with an energy equivalent of about 10^20 joules (10^14 joules per gramm, so 10^6 grams oer tons i looked only at magnitude order - and 10 tons accelerated for 1 g over 1 sec is 10^5 joules - 10000*9.81 rounded - to go to about 100000kms you need to multiply 10^13 so maybe i made an error somewhere). The equivalent fusion would simply gains energy through fusion and lose the same equivalent weight (e mc2). By the way i used only anti matter as a shortgand to show the aburdity as any other fuel is objectively worst.
Even using tons of anti matter fuel and the acceleration you mentionned, that is still an enormous undertaking from 4 ly , not even counting from where such civ could live much further than 4 ly. Far more likely from energy requirement pov, barring making up magic tech , more likely over such distance such a probe would use solar sail. And now counting what we detected was nowhere near c or a fraction of it, there was no real deceleration or acceleration at such a speed when detected. you can take your own conclusion. As for loeb, the reason he is ignored is because when you see something strange, you go from the highest likely explanation to the lowest likely. Problem us there are many far more likely explanation.
Modern nuclear power plants are planned for construction in five years or less (42 months for CANDU ACR-1000, 60 months from order to operation for an AP1000, 48 months from first concrete to operation for an EPR and 45 months for an ESBWR) as opposed to over a decade for some previous plants.
. Even older plant took at most 10 years not fucking 30. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... The first nuclear plant were NOT done in 45+30=74, they were done in the 50ies (first was 1954). Even without googling that should have been readily apparent to mods....
"If any of the pulses' paths are interrupted and they don't arrive at the endpoint at the expected nanosecond, the sender and receiver know their communication has been compromised" it is just plain damn light path measurement, and has nothing to do with real quantum encryption, and the no cloning theorem.
One of the point if you look around for more balanced article, is that the dr korson at the time had not done a muscle biopsy (one diagnosis which is deemed necessary - and reading what he told over the year about his method of "clumping" versus "scattering" diagnosis this brings up certain doubt about him). And certainly there was no mitochondrial genetic analyzes.
Paper usually decompose quite well , and most of it return to the atmosphere under the form of CO2, possibly methane both which are not sequestered, it just seep up. But the whole cutting wood, pulping it, producing paper cutting it to rolls, producing ink, delivering that ink/paper, all cost CO2. So this is not carbon neutral, even if your paper was not decomposing.
For all practical intent and purpose unless you have somebody watching it hourly, you don't need much time or construction equipment to destroy such a wall or go under/over it , at least for the cost of construction cited (to make solid far more solid you would have to increase cost by a manifold). So you would need a lot of fuel/car or heli/personal to go over that border and check it very regularly, or have a huge electric surveillance of that wall. And even then you catch at best only 50% of illegals (half of illegals overstay legal entry, and only part of the other half is using coyote, some do use train/board/truck transportation). Walls are lousy when it comes to stop stuff. All places which had working "walls" have actually dead zone , sniper, mines to make it work (Korea even if it is not a wall is a good example of that, another famous example is east germany and the mines and dead zones, then there is Israel where they use a wall ONLY when they can't have a dead zone and armed people). There is no good example of a working wall "alone".
Big corp can financially and massively comes with scheme to give the false impression or not deliver what is expected. Joe public does not have the resource to either document/study/understand every such a scheme and their result, neither the financial power to fight corp. Thus in all countries, SANE countries not beholden to do blow job to corp, there is a form of consumer protection. If you don't like it, too bad for you, most of us recognize why such laws are in places.
Frankly, I keep repeating myself but here we go: until recentely, facts were not easily researchable. And so fact could be forgotten. Because to find out those facts you had to spend QUITE a bit of research. e.g. if you had a bankruptcy, and search for a job, the guy there hiring you could not find with a few keystroke you HAD that bankruptcy. If he wanted research you he had to hire somebody and pay hard cash to have that research done. Essentially baring important financial job or secret service nigh nobody did that. EFFECTIVELY society forgot by having fact hard to be found. Google changed that. All taboo, all stuff you did are never forgotten and saved forever easy to access at a keystroke. That is especially true if your name is not common. That law changed that, by having certain type of facts pertaining to normal persons (public persona do not benefit from that law) havign a right to be deindexed, forcing you (at least in the spirit of the law) into a old fashionned research. That is also WHY the law pertain to serarch engine only ! Because while you have a right to not be indexed, you have no right to bury the facts. Thus the original source are not touched.
A society which cannot forget is a merciless society , one where you can't have freedom : freedom means touching the side of the road, not the middle. But the side of the road is WHERE the taboo are and people have the most to lose. A society which do not forget is a society suppressing everybody. Think of branding/tattooing an A on your forehead so that everybody know you had adulterous relationship : this is essentially what google do in some case.
You want to live in a society where you are branded forever ? most of us do not want. And before you trot out the crime side : in EU we are strong on rehabilitation, and frankly you can change and have a second chance once you paid your debt. But this is nigh impossible if once your anmed is typed in google the first link is what your crime was. Or worst what you were accused of , but never condemened for , or even acquitted. Chance is nobody will look at the link on the second page showing your acquital.
Once you think about it, the law is not stupid, but reestablishing a status quo we had a few decade ago, and it is a good law to give people second chance. Now naturally you are into crushing people at their first fault , even if acquitted, and never allowing them to stand up again, well sure the law may sound stupid. But you better hope that you never get accused of something falsely, or never have a financial problem which stay in google or anything which may bring people to look down at you. If you do, I hope that somebody do a nelson's "HAHA" pointing finger at you.
You need the GDP per capita with PPP (purchase power parity) correction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... as such china is already ahead of all the country you listed yes they have only 8K$ GDP but with ppp correction you realize they are ahead already of everybody. Furthermore the GDP per capita contains not only good but also service. Eliminate the bank and financial sector from the GDP per capita and the picture may not be as rosy for the US and some heavily financial service invested countries (e.g. the UK which will lose quite a bit of it with brexit). Once you take into account both those factor the US even drop further.
I hate censorship, and IMO stupid ultra right wing conservative (with stupid idea should be allowed to speak up everywhere so that their utterly backward idiotic idea get shot down (and number 1 and 3 certainly belong to that category). But YOU commit the logical error of pretending that his refusal of those people having a speech is NOT about the terrible things those people said or want (especially about 1 and 3) but of another unsaid factor. That alone tells more about you than about him : that you immediately went to their sexuality/gender/skin color shows your tendency of *reducing* people to that. Nothing in his post even hint at that ("That's right, one of the pillars of contemporary right-wing outrage is a completely fabricated issue, lacking even a kernel of truth and actually running counter to reality. Spread the word."). You are attributing your own reflex reaction to him.
1) firstly propose a methodlogy to show the rate of admission of fake paper in various study field including STEM 2) present it as a way to make those field paper review better than a cheap "gotcha". 3) pass this through an ethic commission to make sure your methodlogy pass ethical muster 4) and the most important point : make SURE your university president or whichever management is above you do not disapprove.
We all know that some paper go through with poor quality. Cheap gotcha do not help. Most of us are already aware. If you want to help propose solution, methodology to evaluate the rate, and make sure to involve the local ethical commission. What he did was stupid.
Faith is taking something as true in the absence of evidence (and in some dictionary, cannot be based on evidence). But here is the thing all those stuff you said you took at faith value, in reality are based of a lot of evidence you accepted while learning and you are full well aware that most if not all you could check for evidence of it if you had enough money to spend:
* At school you were taught basic stuff trivial you could check for yourself and later on built upon it with stuff you could check on your own time.
* this built upon stuff you could check with lot of time and money (and here we go geology, geography, and most basic science covered).
* None of this is faith based, as you could any time use your money to VERIFY the existence (e.g. travel to Australia) what you meant is that it is based on TRUST , e.g. trust that all the information given to you during school is true
* Science function on a similar system of TRUST, TRUST is not FAITH, FAITH is believing without evidence but TRUST is accepting something as true based on a repeated pattern of evidence presented to you constructed on a pyramide of previous evidence.
* If that TRUST is broken, you then reject the previous accepted facts or rules. FAITH on the other hand simply tend to "work around" that ("he had not enough faith", "my prayer were not answered because of gods not having time/not praying enough/not being worthy", "gods work in mysterious ways" , "satan placed those bones here",etc...etc...). Basically FAITH you never really revisit the premise. You work around making up excuse - people abandoning faith and switching to another are actually quite rare. That is not the same with TRUST where it can happen often.
* Only one thing could be said to be "faith" and those are AXIOMS. Which is basically stretching the meaning of faith until meaninglessness.
All of this show you why FAITH is not what we use from scientist to lay person when TRUSTING a result we do not take time to verify ourselves.
You have to have to transport the money back to the bank, have it deposited, but then you can get robbed in the shop, or even on the way from the shop to bank, you need insurance, after a certain amount or size you need actually a transport... And what is the cost of all of that ? Genuinely, it may actually be lower than 2 to 5%...
Look at their TOS : "royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the Content in connection with the Service and YouTube's" emphasis mine. You upload it, they can pretty much do everything and anything with it.
I keep hearing from you and other that there are such people with bad experience in germany and other europe country. I simply can only state that from all the peopke i know of some with public some with private insurance none woukd change the system in any shape which would make it more private. Sometimes i would like to meet one of those. Because their experience must gave been a thorough failure and a rare one. There is a reason most people want to keep the public HC system in EU. So the experience you describe seem very very rare and the opinion accompanyng the same.
There is no such a thing as kurdistan. There is turkey country, armenia, irak, iran, syria where kurds live, but no such country as kurdistan. Now a case may be made that there should be one, but factualy there is no kurdistan country.
Firstly most people which go for a private practice Doctor, a generalist which has his cabinet not in a hospital, don't have to wait that long be it in Danemark, Sweden or Germany or France, this is a daily stuff with hours long wait time. Now doctor in a hospital or specialist , like getting a MRI, this is a different story But even there , they have a sort of triage, if you get something they estimate as emergency , you get a much quicker. E.g. when I complained I had head aches for weeks and was taking aspirin daily, they scheduled me for MRI and a echography (for the artery of my neck) the next day in spite of the normal weeks time you normally have. I am not doubting what you got TOLD by your friend, but I am doubting that this is the story as a whole or that it was what really happened as you tell us (story told through 3rd party after all changes - regardless if any party want to really give it back 100% as it happened). Furthermore I have no doubt that over the million of medical stuff a country does in a year, there are some failure. The question is not : are there anecdotal story of failure, there will be in ALL countries even with the best HC, the question is how often and likely are such story to happen. I get the feeling you will agree with me that your anecdot would be quite rare for Danemark, but quite not for the US HC system.
Think about it, commercial whaling will be done only for profit. The things they did with research disguising was government paid. And all indications are that the younger generation despise whaling, and the older one only did it as a tradition (not for the horrid taste). Often whale meat was left to rot because nobody bought it. Thus if it is commercial whaling only... a few may try... Then with collapsing market and nobody buying it, it dies out. Win win on the long run : the japanese government can pretend it did what it's people wanted (well a few of them) and it is not their fault if the market don't buy, and in the long run they can point the finger that the whale number don't drop and tell people "see : nothing bad happens".
It even has symbol painted on the ground showing right side as immobile and left side as walking. Frankly most people also stick to right side even when not prescribed e.g. frankfurt hbf people stick to the right side or go to the right side when they hear you climbing.
Actually this is not about what you identify in the pattern and has never been. What the psychiatrist observe, is when he asks you HOW you came to the idea (which part remind you of what) and what RATIONALIZATION you use. In other word they could not care less that you see a particularly salty penis in one picture (or a breast , vagina or anus) in fact the picture could still be very similar to one. No what they care is how you reason your way around it, how consistent you are about it, if you show pattern of pathology in your explanations. The content you assign to the picture does not matter. In fact you could joke about identifying all as sex/murder picture but be perfectly fine mentally, and the next guy only see cuddly tears but be recognized due to its pattern and rationalization, be identified as pathological.
Slashdot Mirror
https://slashdot.org/comments....
Look , TL;DR : you are basically a proponent of marking any people having been caught adulterous with a red brand on their forehead. This is exactly what you want. Before google and other search engine we all enjoyed a right to be forgotten, in other word a right to be able to correct errors, and become better. If you brand people forever , you effectively destroy their life. Maybe you are an american ? That would explain it, US society seem good on punitive action but not so much on rehabilitation, or prevention.
"scientist X does his job and advanced knowledge a little bit" is unsexy. "scientist is surprised by X" "scientist says X is impossible to be later proven wrong" all are headline which sell 1000 more than the first. As a general rule all fellow scientist I ever worked with WANTED to be surprised, to write their name somewhere, in posterity, to find the new laws, new particle, new material or anything new, the dream of the average scientist is not to go to an event less day at work, or be proven correct in the actual existing knowledge. No the dream is to find something new breaking the old knowledge down and potentially maybe a nobel.
The only one with the "scientist don't like to go agaisnt dogma" or using the "old scientist being proven wrong" are people having NEVER met a scientist : the SAME people endorsing the film/tv serie caricature of a scientist (you know , the first guy being killed by a demon or meeting an angel, or the first guy killed by the monster he said was not existing, you know the trope) and projecting their own unwillingness to face toward the unknown. They think this is what scientist do, because this is what they would do (and in the case of people projecting CT often already do).
They are pretty damn rare, and often taken out of context (like the quote about airplane not being possible - it was about directed flight within the known engineering - dumb but not as dumb as saying flight in general was impossible - just look at birds). I have not seen many of them , usually it is down to claim not being shored up by evidence, but when that DO happens much later to have evidence, then they are recognized. e.g. plate tectonic or giant wave. But even those case are pretty damn rare, and scientist are willing to examine what goes against the old knowledge. If they did not we would still be back to 17th century knowledge. Who do you think threw everything and wanted answers ? The scientist of the 17th, 18th, 19th, 20th and 21st century ! Nobody else !
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... calculating the propellant fraction assuming a rocket is composed in fraction of anti mater. Plugging the tan equation to solve m0/m1 is where I got the 10tons / 4tons.
I calculated the energy requirement to have such acceleration, then converted to the BEST theoretical fuel , anti matter / matter. Fusion would still mean even more material to bring with you. Calculation i did using rocketery rukes is to have a 25% light speed then brake roughly shortly before arriving, and fir alpha centauri, was 4 tons anti matter fuel , for a 6 tons payload, with an energy equivalent of about 10^20 joules (10^14 joules per gramm, so 10^6 grams oer tons i looked only at magnitude order - and 10 tons accelerated for 1 g over 1 sec is 10^5 joules - 10000*9.81 rounded - to go to about 100000kms you need to multiply 10^13 so maybe i made an error somewhere). The equivalent fusion would simply gains energy through fusion and lose the same equivalent weight (e mc2). By the way i used only anti matter as a shortgand to show the aburdity as any other fuel is objectively worst.
Even using tons of anti matter fuel and the acceleration you mentionned, that is still an enormous undertaking from 4 ly , not even counting from where such civ could live much further than 4 ly. Far more likely from energy requirement pov, barring making up magic tech , more likely over such distance such a probe would use solar sail. And now counting what we detected was nowhere near c or a fraction of it, there was no real deceleration or acceleration at such a speed when detected. you can take your own conclusion. As for loeb, the reason he is ignored is because when you see something strange, you go from the highest likely explanation to the lowest likely. Problem us there are many far more likely explanation.
.
Even older plant took at most 10 years not fucking 30. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... The first nuclear plant were NOT done in 45+30=74, they were done in the 50ies (first was 1954). Even without googling that should have been readily apparent to mods....
"If any of the pulses' paths are interrupted and they don't arrive at the endpoint at the expected nanosecond, the sender and receiver know their communication has been compromised" it is just plain damn light path measurement, and has nothing to do with real quantum encryption, and the no cloning theorem.
One of the point if you look around for more balanced article, is that the dr korson at the time had not done a muscle biopsy (one diagnosis which is deemed necessary - and reading what he told over the year about his method of "clumping" versus "scattering" diagnosis this brings up certain doubt about him). And certainly there was no mitochondrial genetic analyzes.
Paper usually decompose quite well , and most of it return to the atmosphere under the form of CO2, possibly methane both which are not sequestered, it just seep up. But the whole cutting wood, pulping it, producing paper cutting it to rolls, producing ink, delivering that ink/paper, all cost CO2. So this is not carbon neutral, even if your paper was not decomposing.
For all practical intent and purpose unless you have somebody watching it hourly, you don't need much time or construction equipment to destroy such a wall or go under/over it , at least for the cost of construction cited (to make solid far more solid you would have to increase cost by a manifold). So you would need a lot of fuel/car or heli/personal to go over that border and check it very regularly, or have a huge electric surveillance of that wall. And even then you catch at best only 50% of illegals (half of illegals overstay legal entry, and only part of the other half is using coyote, some do use train/board/truck transportation). Walls are lousy when it comes to stop stuff. All places which had working "walls" have actually dead zone , sniper, mines to make it work (Korea even if it is not a wall is a good example of that, another famous example is east germany and the mines and dead zones, then there is Israel where they use a wall ONLY when they can't have a dead zone and armed people). There is no good example of a working wall "alone".
Big corp can financially and massively comes with scheme to give the false impression or not deliver what is expected. Joe public does not have the resource to either document/study/understand every such a scheme and their result, neither the financial power to fight corp. Thus in all countries, SANE countries not beholden to do blow job to corp, there is a form of consumer protection. If you don't like it, too bad for you, most of us recognize why such laws are in places.
Frankly, I keep repeating myself but here we go: until recentely, facts were not easily researchable. And so fact could be forgotten. Because to find out those facts you had to spend QUITE a bit of research. e.g. if you had a bankruptcy, and search for a job, the guy there hiring you could not find with a few keystroke you HAD that bankruptcy. If he wanted research you he had to hire somebody and pay hard cash to have that research done. Essentially baring important financial job or secret service nigh nobody did that. EFFECTIVELY society forgot by having fact hard to be found. Google changed that. All taboo, all stuff you did are never forgotten and saved forever easy to access at a keystroke. That is especially true if your name is not common. That law changed that, by having certain type of facts pertaining to normal persons (public persona do not benefit from that law) havign a right to be deindexed, forcing you (at least in the spirit of the law) into a old fashionned research. That is also WHY the law pertain to serarch engine only ! Because while you have a right to not be indexed, you have no right to bury the facts. Thus the original source are not touched.
A society which cannot forget is a merciless society , one where you can't have freedom : freedom means touching the side of the road, not the middle. But the side of the road is WHERE the taboo are and people have the most to lose. A society which do not forget is a society suppressing everybody. Think of branding/tattooing an A on your forehead so that everybody know you had adulterous relationship : this is essentially what google do in some case.
You want to live in a society where you are branded forever ? most of us do not want. And before you trot out the crime side : in EU we are strong on rehabilitation, and frankly you can change and have a second chance once you paid your debt. But this is nigh impossible if once your anmed is typed in google the first link is what your crime was. Or worst what you were accused of , but never condemened for , or even acquitted. Chance is nobody will look at the link on the second page showing your acquital.
Once you think about it, the law is not stupid, but reestablishing a status quo we had a few decade ago, and it is a good law to give people second chance. Now naturally you are into crushing people at their first fault , even if acquitted, and never allowing them to stand up again, well sure the law may sound stupid. But you better hope that you never get accused of something falsely, or never have a financial problem which stay in google or anything which may bring people to look down at you. If you do, I hope that somebody do a nelson's "HAHA" pointing finger at you.
You need the GDP per capita with PPP (purchase power parity) correction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... as such china is already ahead of all the country you listed yes they have only 8K$ GDP but with ppp correction you realize they are ahead already of everybody. Furthermore the GDP per capita contains not only good but also service. Eliminate the bank and financial sector from the GDP per capita and the picture may not be as rosy for the US and some heavily financial service invested countries (e.g. the UK which will lose quite a bit of it with brexit). Once you take into account both those factor the US even drop further.
I hate censorship, and IMO stupid ultra right wing conservative (with stupid idea should be allowed to speak up everywhere so that their utterly backward idiotic idea get shot down (and number 1 and 3 certainly belong to that category).
But YOU commit the logical error of pretending that his refusal of those people having a speech is NOT about the terrible things those people said or want (especially about 1 and 3) but of another unsaid factor. That alone tells more about you than about him : that you immediately went to their sexuality/gender/skin color shows your tendency of *reducing* people to that. Nothing in his post even hint at that ("That's right, one of the pillars of contemporary right-wing outrage is a completely fabricated issue, lacking even a kernel of truth and actually running counter to reality. Spread the word."). You are attributing your own reflex reaction to him.
1) firstly propose a methodlogy to show the rate of admission of fake paper in various study field including STEM
2) present it as a way to make those field paper review better than a cheap "gotcha".
3) pass this through an ethic commission to make sure your methodlogy pass ethical muster
4) and the most important point : make SURE your university president or whichever management is above you do not disapprove.
We all know that some paper go through with poor quality. Cheap gotcha do not help. Most of us are already aware. If you want to help propose solution, methodology to evaluate the rate, and make sure to involve the local ethical commission. What he did was stupid.
Faith is taking something as true in the absence of evidence (and in some dictionary, cannot be based on evidence). But here is the thing all those stuff you said you took at faith value, in reality are based of a lot of evidence you accepted while learning and you are full well aware that most if not all you could check for evidence of it if you had enough money to spend : ,etc...etc...). Basically FAITH you never really revisit the premise. You work around making up excuse - people abandoning faith and switching to another are actually quite rare. That is not the same with TRUST where it can happen often.
* At school you were taught basic stuff trivial you could check for yourself and later on built upon it with stuff you could check on your own time.
* this built upon stuff you could check with lot of time and money (and here we go geology, geography, and most basic science covered).
* None of this is faith based, as you could any time use your money to VERIFY the existence (e.g. travel to Australia) what you meant is that it is based on TRUST , e.g. trust that all the information given to you during school is true
* Science function on a similar system of TRUST, TRUST is not FAITH, FAITH is believing without evidence but TRUST is accepting something as true based on a repeated pattern of evidence presented to you constructed on a pyramide of previous evidence.
* If that TRUST is broken, you then reject the previous accepted facts or rules. FAITH on the other hand simply tend to "work around" that ("he had not enough faith", "my prayer were not answered because of gods not having time/not praying enough/not being worthy", "gods work in mysterious ways" , "satan placed those bones here"
* Only one thing could be said to be "faith" and those are AXIOMS. Which is basically stretching the meaning of faith until meaninglessness.
All of this show you why FAITH is not what we use from scientist to lay person when TRUSTING a result we do not take time to verify ourselves.
You have to have to transport the money back to the bank, have it deposited, but then you can get robbed in the shop, or even on the way from the shop to bank, you need insurance, after a certain amount or size you need actually a transport... And what is the cost of all of that ? Genuinely, it may actually be lower than 2 to 5%...
Look at their TOS : "royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the Content in connection with the Service and YouTube's" emphasis mine. You upload it, they can pretty much do everything and anything with it.
I keep hearing from you and other that there are such people with bad experience in germany and other europe country. I simply can only state that from all the peopke i know of some with public some with private insurance none woukd change the system in any shape which would make it more private. Sometimes i would like to meet one of those. Because their experience must gave been a thorough failure and a rare one. There is a reason most people want to keep the public HC system in EU. So the experience you describe seem very very rare and the opinion accompanyng the same.
There is no such a thing as kurdistan. There is turkey country, armenia, irak, iran, syria where kurds live, but no such country as kurdistan. Now a case may be made that there should be one, but factualy there is no kurdistan country.
Firstly most people which go for a private practice Doctor, a generalist which has his cabinet not in a hospital, don't have to wait that long be it in Danemark, Sweden or Germany or France, this is a daily stuff with hours long wait time. Now doctor in a hospital or specialist , like getting a MRI, this is a different story But even there , they have a sort of triage, if you get something they estimate as emergency , you get a much quicker. E.g. when I complained I had head aches for weeks and was taking aspirin daily, they scheduled me for MRI and a echography (for the artery of my neck) the next day in spite of the normal weeks time you normally have. I am not doubting what you got TOLD by your friend, but I am doubting that this is the story as a whole or that it was what really happened as you tell us (story told through 3rd party after all changes - regardless if any party want to really give it back 100% as it happened). Furthermore I have no doubt that over the million of medical stuff a country does in a year, there are some failure. The question is not : are there anecdotal story of failure, there will be in ALL countries even with the best HC, the question is how often and likely are such story to happen. I get the feeling you will agree with me that your anecdot would be quite rare for Danemark, but quite not for the US HC system.
Think about it, commercial whaling will be done only for profit. The things they did with research disguising was government paid. And all indications are that the younger generation despise whaling, and the older one only did it as a tradition (not for the horrid taste). Often whale meat was left to rot because nobody bought it. Thus if it is commercial whaling only... a few may try... Then with collapsing market and nobody buying it, it dies out. Win win on the long run : the japanese government can pretend it did what it's people wanted (well a few of them) and it is not their fault if the market don't buy, and in the long run they can point the finger that the whale number don't drop and tell people "see : nothing bad happens".
It even has symbol painted on the ground showing right side as immobile and left side as walking. Frankly most people also stick to right side even when not prescribed e.g. frankfurt hbf people stick to the right side or go to the right side when they hear you climbing.
Actually this is not about what you identify in the pattern and has never been. What the psychiatrist observe, is when he asks you HOW you came to the idea (which part remind you of what) and what RATIONALIZATION you use. In other word they could not care less that you see a particularly salty penis in one picture (or a breast , vagina or anus) in fact the picture could still be very similar to one. No what they care is how you reason your way around it, how consistent you are about it, if you show pattern of pathology in your explanations. The content you assign to the picture does not matter. In fact you could joke about identifying all as sex/murder picture but be perfectly fine mentally, and the next guy only see cuddly tears but be recognized due to its pattern and rationalization, be identified as pathological.